You ask for links knowing full well that none exist. :dubious:
If you think the woman willingly wore the headscarf or that the guys shown on Iranian TV appeared without being coerced to do so, then you live on another sphere
I’m pleased. Diplomacy works! I was really quite afraid they were leveraging things against the UN and settling in for the long term propaganda issue.
Are they going to be greeted as heroes when they return to Britain?
Did they resist the Iranian patrol boats, or let themselves be captured without a fight?
There’s not going to be a ticker-tape parade. That’s not British 
Maybe they were following orders not to engage the Iranians. Might explain why Cornwall didn’t open fire, too.
That’s true of any country.
But going to war without a strong casus belli has generally resulted in a net loss of support from other countries across the world and can hurt a state’s diplomatic standing and cost them valuable political capital. It doesn’t mean a state should never go to war without a strong casus belli just that the condemnation and loss of political capital needs to be worth the gains from the subsequent war for it to make sense.
Which rather proves my point; we don’t need one.
Bush is still President, and he’s never shown any concern for any of that.
What do you mean “duress”.
There’s no history of any mistreatment by Iranians of any westerners as best I know in, say the last 20 years - where are you coming from, do you mean an arm up the back, a bit of American style torture ?
I honestly have no idea what you mean - I presume you understand it is standard military training to cooperate with captors and to do everything you can (as a detainee) to diffuse situations. And if I know that, the Iranians know that . . . ?
I thought his Ministers - partic that ridiculous woman Beckett and someone else I forget - did all they could to whip up the mob into a frenzy at a couple of points, esp. when the sailors were shown on tv. Several examples of playing to a partic UK gallery which increased tensions rather than dissipating them.
And no, I don’t think the Ministers were speaking off their own bat.
It’ll obviously take days/weeks for bits and pieces of the deal to emerge. Tomorrow’s Guardian offers a few titbits:
It’s a funny old game.
jesus, that was crap coding. Again.
Hehehe…almost miraculous really. 
…the Iranians have put up a far more convincing case for the guilt of their detainees than the US has for the vast majority of the Guantanemo detainees. They have also apparently been treated better. And also, Red Fury didn’t specify only Guantanemo detainees.
Exactly how do you know that? When I was in the military it was name, rank and serial number. FRDE and I had a discussion about why they might be cooperating with their captors. I don’t remember anyone saying they know for sure.
Uzi: Exactly, name, rank, serial number. That’s all you are required to give your captors, just that and nothing more.
So Elsie: from where do you get the idea that captured military personnel have to do everything to diffuse a situation.
Share with us your source of information.
You are also obligated to give date of birth. Together those are called the Big Four, and they can be found on the back of any military ID, which in the case of the US doubles as the Geneva Conventions Identification Card.
When you are not at war with your captors and it is not a case of terrorist abduction, though, it is not a good idea to stick to that (even though it is perfectly legitimate to do so). There are other things that you are permitted to say, foremost among them being “I wish to see my Ambassador” and “Thank you for helping me, can you please take me to my Embassy?”. These (and other things) are the kinds of things that High-Risk-of-Capture people are taught at SERE school.
Didn’t know about the DoB thing, this must be new?
Am I correct in saying captured military personnel do not have to do everything to diffuse a situation as Elsie seems to think.
SERE school?
Not so much. It’s been the case since long before I went through SERE school (2002).
You are correct. As a captive you have to follow a lawful order from your captors. What entails a lawful order is specifically laid out in the Geneva Conventions. For instance, you cannot be made to construct fortifications or build armaments. You can be made to clean the camp.
S-Survival
E-Evasion
R-Resistance
E-Escape
It’s where you learn how to conduct yourself if you are ever captured. The major focus is how to reconcile the Code of Conduct with the necessity to survive in captivity. You are not obligated to give them anything but the Big Four and you should not ever volunteer anything, but if the options are to give up the goods or die, you give up as little as possible in order to facilitate your survival. That should be the extent of your cooperation. Outright collaboration is a crime, and collaborators can be charged as such upon repatriation.
I’ve had a look at the CoC and have a question concerning captured medical personnel.
Would a captured medic be obliged to render aid to wounded enemy personnel or would this be construed as aiding the enemy should he do so?
chowder - make your point, why this emphasis on everything, you obviously have a wicked trap you are desperate to spring - just let me have it with both barrels . . . .
No trap, I’m just curious about your source of info…if you have one which I doubt